Evidence mapPaperPMID 38200431Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2024

What helps patients access web-based services in primary care? Free-text analysis of patient responses to the Di-Facto questionnaire.

Nada Khan, Emma Pitchforth, Rachel Winder, Gary Abel, Christopher E Clark, Emma Cockcroft, John Campbell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. What patients want from access to UK general practice: systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Nada KhanExeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK. n.khan@exeter.ac.uk.
Emma PitchforthExeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Rachel WinderExeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Gary AbelExeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Christopher E ClarkExeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Emma CockcroftExeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
John CampbellExeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research Programme 128268
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe National Health Service (NHS) and general practice are increasingly adopting digital services. These services can impact both positively and negatively upon patient experiences, and access to digital services is not equal amongst all groups. Within a wider project examining digital facilitation (the Di-Facto study) our team conducted a patient survey amongst English primary care practices aiming to investigate patient views of what supports uptake and use of web-based services. This paper reports on the analysis of the free-text responses from the patient survey.

methodsThe Di-Facto patient survey was distributed to practices in eight clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in England between 2021-2022. We examined free-text responses to two questions relating to access to primary care web-based and support for web-based services. We used qualitative reflexive thematic analysis based on a six-stage process to analyse responses.

resultsOf the 3051 patients who responded to the Di-Facto survey, 2246 provided a free-text response. We present our findings in two major themes: systems and structures and their impact on use of web-based services, and 'what works for me', a description of how respondents described what worked, or did not work in terms of their interactions with web-based services. Respondents described how the technology, such as poor practice website design, confusion over multiple digital apps, data security and concerns about eConsultation offerings impacted on use of web-based services. Respondents described practice level barriers, such as a lack of or inconsistent provision, which prevented optimal use of web-based services. Respondents described personal and technical barriers that impacted on their use of digital services, and described which web-based services worked well for them. Respondents felt that web-based services were not a replacement for face-to-face interactions with a doctor.

conclusionsThis analysis of free-text responses from a large patient survey highlights the system, practice, and person level barriers and facilitators to use of digital services in primary care. With an increasing push towards digital solutions in NHS primary care, practices should consider the design, rollout and communication of their web-based services to support patient access.

Indexed as

CommunicationState MedicineBiological TransportHumansInternetPrimary Health CareDigital divideInternet usePrimary health care

Identifiers

PMID38200431
PMCPMC10777578

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.